首页> 外文期刊>JAMA: the Journal of the American Medical Association >Noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation for postextubation respiratory distress: a randomized controlled trial.
【24h】

Noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation for postextubation respiratory distress: a randomized controlled trial.

机译:拔管后呼吸窘迫的无创正压通气:一项随机对照试验。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

CONTEXT: Noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (NPPV) has been demonstrated to be effective in preventing the need for endotracheal intubation in some patients who present with acute respiratory failure. It is also used for patients who develop acute respiratory distress after extubation, but there are no randomized controlled trials that address its effectiveness in this population. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of NPPV compared with standard medical therapy in preventing the need for endotracheal reintubation in high-risk patients who develop respiratory distress during the first 48 hours after extubation. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled, unblinded study with concealed allocation conducted between August 1, 1996 and October 31, 1999. SETTING: An intensive care unit (ICU) in an academic, tertiary care hospital in Ontario. PATIENTS: Eighty-one patients with a history of cardiac or respiratory disease or who initially required ventilatory support for more than 2 days and who developed respiratory distress within 48 hours of extubation. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive standard medical therapy alone (supplemental oxygen to maintain oxygen saturation by pulse oximetry > or = 95%; n = 42) or NPPV by face mask plus standard medical therapy (n = 39). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates of reintubation, duration of mechanical ventilation, lengths of ICU and hospital stay, and hospital mortality. RESULTS: Comparing the NPPV group with the standard-therapy group, there was no difference in the rate of reintubation (72% vs 69%; relative risk, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-1.38) or hospital mortality (31% for both groups; relative risk, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-1.91). Similarly, no difference was found in duration of mechanical ventilation or length of ICU or hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of NPPV to standard medical therapy does not improve outcome in heterogeneous groups of patients who develop respiratory distress during the first 48 hours after extubation.
机译:背景:无创正压通气(NPPV)已被证明可有效预防某些出现急性呼吸衰竭的患者气管插管。它也用于拔管后出现急性呼吸窘迫的患者,但尚无针对其在该人群中有效性的随机对照试验。目的:确定与标准药物治疗相比,NPPV在拔管后48小时内出现呼吸窘迫的高危患者中预防气管插管的必要性。设计:于1996年8月1日至1999年10月31日之间进行的具有隐蔽分配的随机,对照,无盲研究。地点:安大略省一家学术,三级护理医院的重症监护室(ICU)。患者:八十一名有心脏病或呼吸系统疾病史或最初需要呼吸支持超过2天且在拔管后48小时内出现呼吸窘迫的患者。干预措施:患者被随机分配接受单独的标准药物治疗(通过脉搏血氧饱和度>或= 95%; n = 42)补充氧气或通过面罩加标准药物治疗(n = 39)维持NPPV。主要观察指标:再次插管率,机械通气时间,重症监护病房(ICU)的长度和住院时间以及医院死亡率。结果:NPPV组与标准治疗组相比,再插管率(72%vs 69%;相对危险度1.04; 95%置信区间0.78-1.38)或医院死亡率(31%为两组;相对风险,0.99; 95%置信区间,0.52-1.91)。同样,在机械通气时间,ICU时间或住院时间方面也没有发现差异。结论:标准药物治疗中添加NPPV不能改善拔管后48小时内出现呼吸窘迫的异类患者的预后。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号